Is Evil Independent of God?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
There is a lot more evidense to clarify the existance of D.I.D. then there is to support the existance of God (Christian-Judeo-Islamic God)

D.I.D. cases have less contradicitions and more clarity then ALL of the testiments of God combined.

However, if you want to disregard information that supports the reality of D.I.D., then go right ahead, I am not going to argue that with you.

My point is this: For arguments SAKE, if DID exists, then how can you hold a person with this disorder responsible for a horrible act that one of his or her alters commits ?

There is no good or evil in this case, because no one is to blame. Therefore, the act is neutral.

The act is evil. The disorder would merely counterbalance the action, making the person not accountable for the action, not make the action neutral.

Originally posted by Regret
Being homosexual/bisexual does not give you some special stance on the subject. Being heterosexual provides the same experiences. Did I choose to be heterosexual? Was it a genetic thing? Being homosexual/bisexual biases you in the same manner as being heterosexual biases me, obviously I would know a HELL of a lot more about heterosexuality than you ever would, since I experienced what it is to be one myself. If you did not choose to be homosexual/bisexual, then you were never heterosexual, as it was not in your genetics. Given this, you really don't have "a leg to stand on" if I chose to be heterosexual and not homosexual, and it wasn't genetically dictated for me.

Good Point 👆

Did i ever say anything about Heterosexuality though? NO, so what's your argument ?

Actually, I'm curious :

1) Did you choose to be Heterosexual ? If so when ?

2) When did you hear me say being Homosexual or Bisexual is genetic? I never stated that. I merely said it's not a choice.

3) How do you define homosexuality or heterosexuality anyway ? Do you define it by sexual activities done, or by sexual desires ?

4) Did you know there are Virgins who are Gay or bisexual? Or do you deny thier existance ?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Good Point 👆

Did i ever say anything about Heterosexuality though? NO, so what's your argument ?

You spoke to sexuality. Speaking of homosexuality as chosen or not implies the related option.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Actually, I'm curious :

1) Did you choose to be Heterosexual ? If so when ?

Yes, I did choose heterosexuality. Although the choice was impacted by popular culture. I chose it during my adolescence, when I prefered the physical features of women to men.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
2) When did you hear me say being Homosexual or Bisexual is genetic? I never stated that. I merely said it's not a choice.

If it was not a choice, it was dictated. Given this, the only source of dictated behavior is genetics.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
3) How do you define homosexuality or heterosexuality anyway ? Do you define it by sexual activities done, or by sexual desires ?

Preference.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
4) Did you know there are Virgins who are Gay or bisexual? Or do you deny thier existance ?

Don't really care if there are, doesn't impact anything.

Originally posted by Regret
You spoke to sexuality. Speaking of homosexuality as chosen or not implies the related option.

You're right. IT does.

Originally posted by Regret
Yes, I did choose heterosexuality. Although the choice was impacted by popular culture. I chose it during my adolescence, when I prefered the physical features of women to men.

So you have the ability to choose your desires ? You can CHOOSE what you WANT TO WANT ? OMG..you gotta tell me your SECRET !

Don't delude yourself bro...you didn't choose to "prefer" women's physical features over men. You just DID...that simple.

Originally posted by Regret
If it was not a choice, it was dictated. Given this, the only source of dictated behavior is genetics.

NOPE 👇

For sexual preference to be dictated , there could be infinite factors. Genetics, media, environment, brain chemistry, etc.

There are millions of reasons why a person could be homosexual and heterosexual.

Why are you living in a black and white world ???? That's unrealistic. Are you aware of the fact that there are DIFFERENT TYPES of hetersexuals and different types of homosexuals in terms of sexuality itself ?

How could ONE cause be responsible for ALL of our differences ?

Originally posted by Regret
Preference.

Which is NOT CHOSEN, it develops without your permission.

Originally posted by Regret
Don't really care if there are, doesn't impact anything.

Oh it makes a HUGE difference Regret. ✅ If being Gay, Straight, or Bisexual is a matter of PREFERENCE, than that preference EXISTS even before one becomes sexually active.

If you are a Virgin, and you are gay, then you didn't choose to be gay. How the **** could you choose what to be attracted to ?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
So you have the ability to [b]choose your desires ? You can CHOOSE what you WANT TO WANT ? OMG..you gotta tell me your SECRET !

Don't delude yourself bro...you didn't choose to "prefer" women's physical features over men. You just DID...that simple. [/B]

You are assuming that I never found men attractive in any way. Preference can be altered. At times it is just difficult to do.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
NOPE 👇

For sexual preference to be dictated , there could be infinite factors. Genetics, media, environment, brain chemistry, etc.

There are millions of reasons why a person could be homosexual and heterosexual.

Why are you living in a black and white world ???? That's unrealistic. Are you aware of the fact that there are DIFFERENT TYPES of hetersexuals and different types of homosexuals in terms of sexuality itself ?

How could ONE cause be responsible for ALL of our differences ?

The brain's chemistry is a product of genetics. The media and environment do not dictate, they influence.

You are amusing, for me heterosexuality means that one's sexual preference and behavior are towards the opposite sex, while homosexuality means that one's sexual preference and behavior are towards the same sex. Specific activity means nothing. I am assuming you are referring to anal sex, oral sex, BD&SM, etc. Types of activity are irrelevant.

I do not believe ONE cause is responsible for this variation, I do not believe there is a genetic cause for homosexual behavior. I believe that it is a product of environmental impact combined with choices made.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Which is NOT CHOSEN, it develops without your permission.

It is chosen. You like specific foods based on what you sample, while some of this is due to your parents, this is still a choice made by someone. Preference is often chosen, and then reinforced through the consequences.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Oh it makes a HUGE difference Regret. ✅ If being Gay, Straight, or Bisexual is a matter of PREFERENCE, than that preference EXISTS even before one becomes sexually active.

If you are a Virgin, and you are gay, then you didn't choose to be gay. How the **** could you choose what to be attracted to ?

Sexual activity is not necessary for sexual preference. If preference is a portion of what defines sexuality, then the presence of this preference has begun to define sexuality. Being a virgin is merely the fact that one has not yet participated in a sexual act, it does not define sexuality.

Originally posted by Regret
You are assuming that I never found men attractive in any way. Preference can be altered. At times it is just difficult to do.

There is a major difference between finding men attractive and being attracted to men.

A lot of Gay guys find women attractive, and a lot of Straight Men find other men attractive. Sexual DESIRE for that person is what makes you homosexual or heterosexual or bisexual (or even Asexual)

I do beleive that Sexuality can be altered, due to many many factors, but not chosen.

You do not CHOOSE what you like, but you can force yourself to lack of exposure to what you like...

to do so is pointless though, because there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. You are not hurting anyone.

Originally posted by Regret
The brain's chemistry is a product of genetics. The media and environment do not dictate, they influence.

Sexual Orientation may or may not be a product of genetics though. Or perhaps its a product of genetics in some people, and NOT in others...

We don't know..so what the point is arguing that ?

Originally posted by Regret
You are amusing, for me heterosexuality means that one's sexual preference and behavior are towards the opposite sex, while homosexuality means that one's sexual preference and behavior are towards the same sex. Specific activity means nothing. I am assuming you are referring to anal sex, oral sex, BD&SM, etc. Types of activity are irrelevant.

I agree...sexuality activity is irrelevant. There are Gay men who get married, have children, and chose to live the "heterosexual lifestyle" yet are still Gay, because they are not enjoying sex with thier wives, and lust for men thier entire lives.

Sexual Behavior means nothing in terms of sexual orientation....what you WANT to do, and what you actually DO are two different things.

Since your desires are MORE TRUE than your actions, it is only logical that being Gay or Straight is about what you DESIRE and not about what you actually do.

Originally posted by Regret
I do not believe ONE cause is responsible for this variation, I do not believe there is a genetic cause for homosexual behavior. I believe that it is a product of environmental impact combined with choices made.

There is no genetic cause for Homosexual Behavior, but there may be a genetic cause for Homosexual ORIENTATION.

There a "straight" men in prisons who engage in homosexual activity, but are not truly homosexual. In the absense of a woman, many of them settle for men, but would much prefer women..that makes them straight (or bisexual).

Choices have nothing to do with it.....you don't choose what you like, you only choose what you do.

Sexual Orientation is not about what you DO, it's about what you WANT to do....

Originally posted by Regret
It is chosen. You like specific foods based on what you sample, while some of this is due to your parents, this is still a choice made by someone. Preference is often chosen, and then reinforced through the consequences.

What a HORRIBLE ANALOGY as you always make them....

You are claiming that Virgins do not know what they want, since they never had sex.

I didn't have sex with any man until I was 18, and even BEFORE that I KNEW I liked men.

Preference is NOT CHOSEN, its a given. You like or you don't...that simple.

Originally posted by Regret
Sexual activity is not necessary for sexual preference. If preference is a portion of what defines sexuality, then the presence of this preference has begun to define sexuality. Being a virgin is merely the fact that one has not yet participated in a sexual act, it does not define sexuality.

You are contradicting yourself BIG TIME

You are saying that Sexual Activity is not necessary for sexual preference and THEN you are saying that Preference is chosen by sexual experiences and choices.....MAKE UP YOUR DAMN MIND !

Being a Virgin does NOT define sexuality, i AGREE

But neither does Sexual Activity.

Sexual Preference and Orientation is about DESIRE not about activity. You do not choose your desires, you can only choose to give into them, or ignore them.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
There is a major difference between finding men attractive and [b]being attracted to men.

A lot of Gay guys find women attractive, and a lot of Straight Men find other men attractive. Sexual DESIRE for that person is what makes you homosexual or heterosexual or bisexual (or even Asexual)

I do beleive that Sexuality can be altered, due to many many factors, but not chosen.

You do not CHOOSE what you like, but you can force yourself to lack of exposure to what you like...

to do so is pointless though, because there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. You are not hurting anyone. [/B]

I disagree with your "belief", given that it is a belief and not not based in fact I won't argue it.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Sexual Orientation may or may not be a product of genetics though. Or perhaps its a product of genetics in some people, and NOT in others...

We don't know..so what the point is arguing that ?

You used your "knowledge" that homosexual orientation was not chosen as support for your argument. It is being argued because you claimed it was not chosen and was thus dictated in some way. The fact that we don't know, breaks one of your claims

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
I agree...sexuality activity is irrelevant. There are Gay men who get married, have children, and chose to live the "heterosexual lifestyle" yet are still Gay, because they are not enjoying sex with thier wives, and lust for men thier entire lives.

Sexual Behavior means nothing in terms of sexual orientation....what you WANT to do, and what you actually DO are two different things.

Since your desires are [b]MORE TRUE than your actions, it is only logical that being Gay or Straight is about what you DESIRE and not about what you actually do. [/B]

Agreed. Although given exposure to reinforcement, preference will shift. Given this preference can be changed 😉

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
There is no genetic cause for Homosexual Behavior, but there may be a genetic cause for Homosexual ORIENTATION.

There a "straight" men in prisons who engage in homosexual activity, but are not truly homosexual. In the absense of a woman, many of them settle for men, but would much prefer women..that makes them straight (or bisexual).

Choices have nothing to do with it.....you don't choose what you like, you only choose what you do.

Sexual Orientation is not about what you DO, it's about what you WANT to do....

I will just disagree with your stance.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
What a HORRIBLE ANALOGY as you always make them....

You are claiming that Virgins do not know what they want, since they never had sex.

I didn't have sex with any man until I was 18, and even BEFORE that I KNEW I liked men.

Preference is NOT CHOSEN, its a given. You like or you don't...that simple.

It was not an analogy to sexuality. It was an example of preference.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
[b]You are contradicting yourself BIG TIME

You are saying that Sexual Activity is not necessary for sexual preference and THEN you are saying that Preference is chosen by sexual experiences and choices.....MAKE UP YOUR DAMN MIND !

Being a Virgin does NOT define sexuality, i AGREE

But neither does Sexual Activity.

Sexual Preference and Orientation is about DESIRE not about activity. You do not choose your desires, you can only choose to give into them, or ignore them. [/B]

Activity does. Preference can only be observed through behavior. If someone says one thing and does another he is not the thing he says.

Now, as to personal stance, that is one thing, but when speaking of others observable behavior is all you have to go on. You yourself are not one of these individuals (straight but acting homosexual) by your own admission, thus you are unable to "know" any such thing as fact. You are inferring based on statements that these individuals have made, people lie. You only have behavior to go off of as far as evidence.

I am not contradictory. Action, intent and context define the situation. They cannot be separated.

You seem to turn our discussions to the sexuality argument. I personally do not typically comment on this unless it is brought up in discussion I am part of. And I do not believe homosexuality is a necessary aspect of our discussion, if we could move back to the topic of evil it would be welcomed.

Originally posted by Regret
I disagree with your "belief", given that it is a belief and not not based in fact I won't argue it.

How is not based on fact? It's based on Observation, and more self-evident than your claim that Homosexuality is immoral.

Originally posted by Regret
You used your "knowledge" that homosexual orientation was not chosen as support for your argument. It is being argued because you claimed it was not chosen and was thus dictated in some way. The fact that we don't know, breaks one of your claims

So you are calling me a Liar ? 🙄

Originally posted by Regret
Agreed. Although given exposure to reinforcement, preference will shift. Given this preference can be changed 😉

I do beleive Preference can be changed, but rarely is it successfully changed through force or intent.

My ex boyfreind said he didn't "turn gay" until he was 18. He said that before that he liked women only, but over time he started finding guys more and more attractive.

He didn't have sex with a guy until age 21, but before that he would masturbate over the thought of guys....

Until today, he still doesn't know how his interest in men came about...but I tell you, he says it wasn't a choice.

He didn't make himself like guys....the attraction came to him, without his permission.

Originally posted by Regret
I will just disagree with your stance.

Because that's all you CAN DO...so far your arguments are unsuccessful in proving anything...

Originally posted by Regret
It was not an analogy to sexuality. It was an example of preference.

The example did NOT support your point. It must made your argument look more ignorant and desperate. ✅

Originally posted by Regret
Activity does. Preference can only be observed through behavior. If someone says one thing and does another he is not the thing he says.

Preference can be recorded through interview.

And your second statement is INCORRECT.

There are tons of Homosexual Men who live the "heterosexual" lifestyle by getting married, having children, and only having sex with thier wife. They don't enjoy it, and long for a relationship with a man instead.

How do you explain that ?

Originally posted by Regret
Now, as to personal stance, that is one thing, but when speaking of others observable behavior is all you have to go on. You yourself are not one of these individuals (straight but acting homosexual) by your own admission, thus you are unable to "know" any such thing as fact. You are inferring based on statements that these individuals have made, people lie. You only have behavior to go off of as far as evidence.

Yes, people do lie. A lot of people who claim to be straight, are in fact Gay or atleast bisexual.

But Truth is truth, regardless of who admits what.

What I am saying is NOT a personal stance...its Truth, because I am telling you "my" truth.

I did not choose to be bisexual. I was bisexual ever since age 12, yet i was not sexually active until age 17.

By disregarding my claim, and by telling me that i virtually do not know about myself, you are straight up calling me a liar...

Originally posted by Regret
I am not contradictory. Action, intent and context define the situation. They cannot be separated.

You ARE contradictory...

First you say that Sexual Preference does not rely on sexual behavior, then you say it DOES....make up your mind !

Originally posted by Regret
You seem to turn our discussions to the sexuality argument. I personally do not typically comment on this unless it is brought up in discussion I am part of. And I do not believe homosexuality is a necessary aspect of our discussion, if we could move back to the topic of evil it would be welcomed.

This is MY THREAD.....IF i choose to respond to your claims, I will do so all I want. If you'd like to back out because you do not have any valid arguments to supply, then just say so.

Otherwise, take this to PM. 😉

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
How is not based on fact? It's based on Observation, and more self-evident than your claim that Homosexuality is immoral.

So you are calling me a Liar ? 🙄

I do beleive Preference can be changed, but rarely is it successfully changed through force or intent.

My ex boyfreind said he didn't "turn gay" until he was 18. He said that before that he liked women only, but over time he started finding guys more and more attractive.

He didn't have sex with a guy until age 21, but before that he would masturbate over the thought of guys....

Until today, he still doesn't know how his interest in men came about...but I tell you, he says it wasn't a choice.

He didn't make himself like guys....the attraction came to him, without his permission.

Because that's all you CAN DO...so far your arguments are unsuccessful in proving anything...

The example did NOT support your point. It must made your argument look more ignorant and desperate. ✅

Preference can be recorded through interview.

And your second statement is INCORRECT.

There are tons of Homosexual Men who live the "heterosexual" lifestyle by getting married, having children, and only having sex with thier wife. They don't enjoy it, and long for a relationship with a man instead.

How do you explain that ?

Yes, people do lie. A lot of people who claim to be straight, are in fact Gay or atleast bisexual.

But Truth is truth, regardless of who admits what.

What I am saying is NOT a personal stance...its Truth, because I am telling you "my" truth.

I did not choose to be bisexual. I was bisexual ever since age 12, yet i was not sexually active until age 17.

By disregarding my claim, and by telling me that i virtually do not know about myself, you are straight up calling me a liar...

You ARE contradictory...

First you say that Sexual Preference does not rely on sexual behavior, then you say it DOES....make up your mind !

This is [b]MY THREAD.....IF i choose to respond to your claims, I will do so all I want. If you'd like to back out because you do not have any valid arguments to supply, then just say so.

Otherwise, take this to PM. 😉 [/B]

Lord U:

I apologize for breaking into your argument, but I have a few thoughts. There is a difference between lying and being unconsiously self-deceptive. All human beings operate on some level of self-deception. Very few people have a good handle on exactly what they want and what is good for them. Regret is not calling you a liar and he's not even calling you self-deceptive. He's saying that just because someone (anyone) calls themselves homosexual, bi-sexual, etc..., doesn't mean they actually are.

Why does the reality of married men who consider themselves homosexual need to be explained? Or to put it another way, what does the existence of such men prove or disprove about your current argument? Why can't they be either in denial or comforming to societal norms?

Lastly, your continued insistence on self declaration of victory for yourself or defeat for your argument opponent is unecessary. Why are you the arbiter and judge of who has won the argument?

New here. I've been throroughly enjoying the threads.

Originally posted by docb77
No, the compass is revelation from God. In other words, answers to prayers.

Even assuming the traditions of the Catholic church were infallible, that would just leave one with more maps, not a real compass.

Not sure what you mean by revelation from God equaling answers to prayers. Expand on that if you could.

I understand you may not believe the Catholic Church is the compass; but believing it is does not add a new map. The Majesterium is the the thing that provides a singular and infallible interpretation of the map (God's Revelation).

Originally posted by The Achiever
Lord U:
I apologize for breaking into your argument, but I have a few thoughts.

No need to apologize Achiever....I am always happy to answer one's argument. 😉

Originally posted by The Achiever
There is a difference between lying and being unconsiously self-deceptive. All human beings operate on some level of self-deception.

I agree. Yet whose to say my level of self deception is any deeper than your own, or Regret's ?

Religious Idealogy seems to me like the ULTAMATE SELF DECEPTION..yet to you and Regret its truth. Whose to say what's what now ?

Originally posted by The Achiever
Very few people have a good handle on exactly what they want and what is good for them.

And I suppose you know what's good for me ? 🙄

As if you know ANYTHING about my Life, or what makes me Happy...

Originally posted by The Achiever
Regret is not calling you a liar and he's not even calling you self-deceptive. He's saying that just because someone (anyone) calls themselves homosexual, bi-sexual, etc..., doesn't mean they actually are.

And how does he know this, is what I am asking....

Originally posted by The Achiever
Why does the reality of married men who consider themselves homosexual need to be explained? Or to put it another way, what does the existence of such men prove or disprove about your current argument? Why can't they be either in denial or comforming to societal norms?

Denial of what ?

How many reports have you even researched ? There are plenty of Gay men that marry women, and stay in relationships with them for YEARS just to fit "cultural norms"

IN FACT..there are even Gay men who WANT to be Straight...get this...Gay men who WANT to be Straight...try thier hardest....think that getting married to a beautiful Woman will change anything...

And it doesn't.....

It does need to be explained, because Regret claimed that what a person desires isn't valid until they DO the desire. He says what makes the person what they are is there ACTIONS, not there mentality.

I gave an example of how his claim is FALSE.

Originally posted by The Achiever
Lastly, your continued insistence on self declaration of victory for yourself or defeat for your argument opponent is unecessary. Why are you the arbiter and judge of who has won the argument?

Victory over myself ? Please.... 🙄

I know what I am, and Regret who knows NOTHING about me or my life is trying to define me based on a username and my arguments....

I made a point that he can't dance around....

Originally posted by The Achiever
New here. I've been throroughly enjoying the threads.

Good ! 👆

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
WE are discussing if Moral Neutrality exists.

He says there is ONLY good and evil, no neutral.

I say there IS a neutral, as well as good and evil.

I asked him what if a person with D.I.D. committed a crime while under possession of one of their alter egos ?

He says that D.I.D. might not really exist, and therefore whatever crime that person commits is automatically evil.

Can an action or decision have elements of good and evil, and not be neutral? In other words, can the good outweigh the bad? Maybe we need to distinguish a good/evil action from a good/evil person. No person is all good or all evil. Even Satan is good in the sense that he exists and acts. The truly evil person would simply be an isolated blob.

I think this whole discussion may be clouded by our failure to define what we mean by evil and by good. Or rather, the assumption in this argument is the exact opposite of the Augustinian privation of good definition of evil - that is you are implicitely positing as your definition of good as privation of evil. Further, it seems that you are operating with an assumption that the Christion understanding of evil (correct me if I'm wrong) is the list of things that God doesn't like and will punish us for doing or engaging in. This is all not quite right and muddies the discussion. But if these are the assumption then of course there are neutral actions. For example, God doesn't give a shit if I brush my teeth with baking soda toothpaste or mint and flouride and it's pretty absurd to suggest that either choice is good or evil.

But if we come at it with a different definition of evil our discussion may change. If you accept the Augustinian definition of evil as a privation of good, then you must give the definition its full and complete meaning and implication in order to truly disect and discuss its validity. If evil is privation of good, then the real key to this discussion is a proper definition of goodness.

Goodness for a Christian is linked with love, but more particularly wholeness and completeness (holiness). We've all intuited this completeness, to be "filled" to the brim with love - the complete union with others and with God. All choices, decisions, even thoughts that inhibit or reduce this completeness, no matter how small and seemingly inconsequential, are evil. Living life avoiding evil in this sense is quite simply living heaven on earth, but an incomplete and tainted heaven because it is on earth. Punishment for evil then is not meted out by God like some sort of hall monitor, but simply the recognition of incompleteness and lack of wholeness allowed and permitted by God to remain. The further we deprive ourselves from this wholeness (holiness) the closer we are to hell of our own creation and choosing. God allowing or creating Hell is simply his permitting us to live in the place of our choosing.

(No time to review the above to see if it makes any sense, but I'll respond to comments.)

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Total Bullshit 👇

Without evil, you'd have infinite good or neutral choices to make. You must live in such a black and white world, that you think everything exists in dichomoty. How sad ❌

Being "Good" doesn't make you a zombie, and being isolated from evil doesn't make you any less free...

What does good or neutral mean without evil? Are not evil/good relative terms requiring the other to create meaning?

Maybe you should provide your definition of good so we make sure we are talking about the same thing when we use the word.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that God created humans for the purpose of loving each other and loving God. Now take the Garden of Eden Genesis story as an example. God gives Adam and Eve a beautiful garden paradise but gives them one rule. Don't eat fruit from that one tree. Does such a scenario allow for any real freedom to obey, honor or love God? It would be ludicrous to choose to eat from the forbidden tree. It's too easy. It does not allow for a meaningful relationship with God. It's childish and immature, shallow and static, because it doesn't require anything of substance from Adam and Eve. Our coming at it another way, let's say all we had was the ability to choose only good actions, or say anytime we were about to do an action that would harm someone else, God would immediately miraculously prevent it from happening. Is that freedom? Does that allow for a real dynamic relationship with others and God. What about best friends? Would your relationships with friends and significant others feel meaningful and important if all the good things you did for each other were inevitible rather than conscious decisions to do good rather than bad? It leaves all relationships flat and unsatisfying.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
The Hot/Cold arguments were just as valid or invalid as my "statements" as there is no absolute truth assossiated with either argument.

None of us know the true phenomena of Good and Evil, as good and evil are INDEPENDENT of religion and logic.

Their little theories aren't even supported by thier Faith, so that takes away even more possibility of truth to thier arguments.

If you don't believe an absolute truth is associated with any argument or that one argument can't be more valid than another statement, than why do you continue to makes claims on this discussion forum that arguments are won or lost on this board or that others are unsuccessful in proving their positions. On what basis do you make such claims unless by an implied absolute standard to which such arguments either correspond or fail to correspond?

In what sense do mean good and evil are independent from religion and logic?How can anything be independent of logic? I can see how something can be incapable of pure logical proof, but that doesn't make it independent of logic.

Whose "little theories" aren't supported by their faith? In what sense are they "little"? Explain how their faith contradicts their theories.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
No need to apologize Achiever....I am always happy to answer one's argument. 😉

I agree. Yet whose to say my level of self deception is any deeper than your own, or Regret's ?

Religious Idealogy seems to me like the ULTAMATE SELF DECEPTION..yet to you and Regret its truth. Whose to say what's what now ?

And I suppose you know what's good for me ? 🙄

As if you know ANYTHING about my Life, or what makes me Happy...

And how does he know this, is what I am asking....

Denial of what ?

How many reports have you even researched ? There are plenty of Gay men that marry women, and stay in relationships with them for YEARS just to fit "cultural norms"

IN FACT..there are even Gay men who WANT to be Straight...get this...Gay men who WANT to be Straight...try thier hardest....think that getting married to a beautiful Woman will change anything...

And it doesn't.....

It does need to be explained, because Regret claimed that what a person desires isn't valid until they DO the desire. He says what makes the person what they are is there ACTIONS, not there mentality.

I gave an example of how his claim is FALSE.

Victory over myself ? Please.... 🙄

I know what I am, and Regret who knows NOTHING about me or my life is trying to define me based on a username and my arguments....

I made a point that he can't dance around....

Good ! 👆 [/B][/QUOTE]

We may in fact be in as much or more denial than any other person. What does that have to do with our discussion of sexual preference? We're not talking about YOUR sexual preference.

What do you mean by religious idealogy? My understanding of reality is in fact colored by my religion - so I'll assume that's what you mean. It may seem like self-deception to you. Fair enough. By the way, I am not saying that all people who call themselves homosexual or bi-sexual are self-deceived, just that a person's (not you specifically) self-labeled sexual preference is not 100% reliable.

There are also lots of men who have a sexual predisposition and attraction to little boys. If they don't act on the impulse they are not pedaphiles, they are simply individuals who have a socially unhealthy impulse. I'm not disagreeing with your examples of gay men living a family life or wishing they could be straight. But again, what does that have to do with our discussion. These examples do not at all disprove Regrets statement that actions define your sexuality not your mental or emotional preference; no more than my example disproves it. I'm sure most pedaphiles wish they weren't attracted to little kids. (By the way, don't assume that my analogy is meant to suggest that homosexuality is otherwise similar in any way with pedaphilia - I simply brought it up to illustrate the possibility of a sexual inclination that does not without action define the individual.)

not hate. The more appropriate opposite of love is use/abuse. If I claim to be your friend but instead use you to get what I want - treat you as a means to my ends - I am much further away from loving you than if I'm yelling at you and passionately desiring to hurt you.

Originally posted by The Achiever
What does good or neutral mean without evil? Are not evil/good relative terms requiring the other to create meaning?.

The word "Good" is not as imporant as the existance of Good itself. What things do you imagine you and I would consider good...just for arguments sake, let's say "Love, respect, peace, etc."..then what things do we consider bad? Again, let's just say "Hate, Disrespect, War, etc."

Can Love, Respect and Peace exist WITHOUT Hate, Disrespect, and War ?

ABSOLUTELY !

So if ALL THINGS were good, and there was nothing to consider "evil" the only problem would be that the word "good" wouldn't exist. However, the goodness itself would still exist, independent of any evil OR neutrality for that matter.

Originally posted by The Achiever
Maybe you should provide your definition of good so we make sure we are talking about the same thing when we use the word.

I simply define GOOD as anything that generates Peace, Love, and Happiness (for ALL people, not just a select few)....now yes, that sounds totally unrealistic and childish...

So let me define Evil instead...my definition if "Evil" is any act or intention that aims to Kill, Torture, or Control another person or living thing.

CAn Life exist without murder? Yes. Can Peace and Pleasure exist without torment? Yes. Can Freedom exist without Absolute Control ? YES

I don't see how you think EVIL is "necessary" for good to exist.

Originally posted by The Achiever
Let's assume for the sake of argument that God created humans for the purpose of loving each other and loving God. Now take the Garden of Eden Genesis story as an example. God gives Adam and Eve a beautiful garden paradise but gives them one rule. Don't eat fruit from that one tree. Does such a scenario allow for any real freedom to obey, honor or love God? It would be ludicrous to choose to eat from the forbidden tree. It's too easy. It does not allow for a meaningful relationship with God. It's childish and immature, shallow and static, because it doesn't require anything of substance from Adam and Eve. .

Not to mention its absurd for a mature and Loving God to punish INNOCENT generations to COME just because Adam and Eve ate a fkn apple.

I take it you don't take the Adam and Eve story literally....hopefully you don't.

Originally posted by The Achiever
Our coming at it another way, let's say all we had was the ability to choose only good actions, or say anytime we were about to do an action that would harm someone else, God would immediately miraculously prevent it from happening. Is that freedom? Does that allow for a real dynamic relationship with others and God. What about best friends? Would your relationships with friends and significant others feel meaningful and important if all the good things you did for each other were inevitible rather than conscious decisions to do good rather than bad? It leaves all relationships flat and unsatisfying.

That's a very good Point 👆

However, if the only options we had were "good" we wouldn't know the difference, would we ?

If all we knew was pleasure, than we wouldn't know things like "boredom" or "unsatisfaction". So those things wouldn't exist.

If God made himself closer to us in THIS LIFE, instead of making us WAIT for him in the afterlife, don't you imagine we would all be a lot happier and more complete ?

With God's Absolute Presence in our midst, his own, and no other forces', if he is a God of true Love and Happiness, then wouldn't we be Happy and Complete already ? What would be the point to doing evil, if we were already satisfied with our Creator's presence and knowledge ?

No...instead your God puts us on this world, making his presence UNCERTAIN, and puttin us in a HARSH world where Survival is the # 1 aim of all living things....we REALLY NEED THAT to have True Freedom ?

So can you say that Freedom is really freedom, even when one's freedom violates someone else's ? If I am free to kill another person, than that victim was NOT FREE to continue living, because I took that right away....

WOW.....such FREEDOM God gave us.... 🙄

Originally posted by The Achiever
Can an action or decision have elements of good and evil, and not be neutral? In other words, can the good outweigh the bad? Maybe we need to distinguish a good/evil action from a good/evil person. No person is all good or all evil. Even Satan is good in the sense that he exists and acts. The truly evil person would simply be an isolated blob.

I actually beleive slightly differently...I think ALL people exist in variations of good or evil. I don't beleive there is any such thing as a "neutral person". Everyone has biases, and everyone DOES things, and everyone has thier own intents. We are all some level of good or evil....that I can agree to.

However, not all actions contain morality. Something that was intended for good may be bad, and vise versa. Some actions may have NO AFFECT whatsoever, and how could you say its good or evil ?

Some acts are good or bad, but are ACCIDENTS...and if there is NO INTENT of evil for a "bad action", then the action CANNOT BE rendered "Evil" because there is no malice involved. It can't be good either though, so NEUTRAL is the only option left.

The point is you seem to live in black and white and ignore the grey. That is the biggest mistake anyone can make.

As for Satan...he may not exist. So i am not going to refer to him for ANY example. He's nothing more than a rip off of Hades, Angra Mainu, Anubis, and the like to me.....

Originally posted by The Achiever
I think this whole discussion may be clouded by our failure to define what we mean by evil and by good. Or rather, the assumption in this argument is the exact opposite of the Augustinian privation of good definition of evil - that is you are implicitely positing as your definition of good as privation of evil.

EVERYONE has different definitions of Good and Evil. If you would like me to clarify what mine are, i'd be happy to, but I'd ask you to clarify your defintions to me as well.

Remember..Morality is more subjective than anything.

Originally posted by The Achiever
Further, it seems that you are operating with an assumption that the Christion understanding of evil (correct me if I'm wrong) is the list of things that God doesn't like and will punish us for doing or engaging in. This is all not quite right and muddies the discussion.

Actually you are correct, that is exactly my assumption. ✅

There are things that Christians consider evil (like Homosexuality or Early Abortion) that I do not see as evil at ALL.

You know in the Bible it says that it's a sin for a man to shave his beard 😆

It's also a "Sin" for you to look at another person with ANY degree of lust, if you're already taken, even though you do not choose who you are turned on by.....

WOW so evil.....my point is if the CHristian TRANSLATION of morality comes from the Bible, then the Christian understanding of evil is sorely FLAWED in my opinion, and therefore INVALID.

Originally posted by The Achiever
But if these are the assumption then of course there are neutral actions. For example, God doesn't give a shit if I brush my teeth with baking soda toothpaste or mint and flouride and it's pretty absurd to suggest that either choice is good or evil.

Then why does he care who I have sex with if its consentual ?

Why does he care if i shave my beard or not ?

Why does he care when or how often I masturbate?

why does he care what I watch on television ?

Why does he care If I don't want to get married, or if i don't want children ?

Why does he care the subject matter of what I draw as an Artist?

Why does he care if I go to mass or not ?

Why does he care if...etc...etc...etc...etc...etc...etc..etc...etc..etc...etc..etc....... 🙄

Originally posted by The Achiever
But if we come at it with a different definition of evil our discussion may change. If you accept the Augustinian definition of evil as a privation of good, then you must give the definition its full and complete meaning and implication in order to truly disect and discuss its validity. If evil is privation of good, then the real key to this discussion is a proper definition of goodness.

I do not beleive that Good and Evil require eachother to exist. I infact beleive that they require a LACK of the other to truly exist...however, i do not beleive that one is the ABSENSE of the other...it just NEEDS an absense of the other.

Originally posted by The Achiever
Goodness for a Christian is linked with love, but more particularly wholeness and completeness (holiness). We've all intuited this completeness, to be "filled" to the brim with love - the complete union with others and with God. All choices, decisions, even thoughts that inhibit or reduce this completeness, no matter how small and seemingly inconsequential, are evil.

That's again just your opinion, and just as valid or invalid as my own.

I do agree that True Good accompanies a Peaceful union with others...but God ? He may or may not exist....

There are tons of people who don't beleive in God who are great loving people. There are also tons of people who DO beleive in God who are cruel, prejudice, greedy, and hateful.

This may be going off point, so I'll only say this much:

If you beleive that God is the source of all good, and if that works for you, then I encourage it. I do not ask you to change your beleifs, i only ask that you recognize the perspectives and experiences of other people as VALID and real as your own....

I consider myself a VERY loving person. I hate no one, I am not prejudice, I try to help as many people as I can, and my only want is for the happiness of those I love. I also put the happiness and safety of others before myself.

I don't beleive in God though...for many many reasons. Do I hate him ? How can I hate someone who i dont thnk exists ?

I just don't NEED a God to know Love...i already know Love. I already possess it. I already own it...that's my point. You act as if the only people who know Love or give Love are the people who worship God, and that my freind is a misconception.

Originally posted by The Achiever
Living life avoiding evil in this sense is quite simply living heaven on earth, but an incomplete and tainted heaven because it is on earth. Punishment for evil then is not meted out by God like some sort of hall monitor, but simply the recognition of incompleteness and lack of wholeness allowed and permitted by God to remain.

Again this is just your beleif, and nothing I say will convince you otherwise...Likewise, your testiments, as logical as they appear, convince me of nothing.

Originally posted by The Achiever
The further we deprive ourselves from this wholeness (holiness) the closer we are to hell of our own creation and choosing. God allowing or creating Hell is simply his permitting us to live in the place of our choosing.

I Disagree.

You don't need God, you don't need to worship anyone to be "complete".

You can be happy, loving, and live a GREAT LIFE without all of that. Do you imagine that ALL ATHIESTS, or ALL GAYS and LESBIANS, or ALL BUDDHISTS, live horrible and incomplete lives? You really think we are all creating our own Hells ? 🙄

You are DELUDED if you think that's the case.

Originally posted by The Achiever
(No time to review the above to see if it makes any sense, but I'll respond to comments.)

It does make sense, but did not convince me of much. ❌ Sorry.

So your argument is that ignorance is Bliss?

Having felt hatred directed at me, I have a deeper appreciation of love when i recieve it. Having felt troubled, I appreciate those moments of peace much more.

No, I agree with you that Good is not dependent on evil to exist. I would argue however that without opposites, it becomes difficult to recognize those abstract concepts. Perhaps it's difficult to visualize a world lacking opposites due tho the fact that we live in a world filled with such opposites.

Originally posted by The Achiever
We may in fact be in as much or more denial than any other person. What does that have to do with our discussion of sexual preference? We're not talking about YOUR sexual preference.

Then whose sexual preference are we talking about ?

You think any one example can represent ALL people and ALL sexual preferences ?

I was just giving you an example, being that I AM Bisexual, and that I'd happen to know more about it than you would (I beleive so atleast).

Originally posted by The Achiever
What do you mean by religious idealogy? My understanding of reality is in fact colored by my religion - so I'll assume that's what you mean. It may seem like self-deception to you. Fair enough. By the way, I am not saying that all people who call themselves homosexual or bi-sexual are self-deceived, just that a person's (not you specifically) self-labeled sexual preference is not 100% reliable.

What does Reliable mean though ?

If I am guessing correctly, then I'd have to agree. My freind Jeselle, a very close freind of mine, called herself "straight" all her life. Then a few years ago she became attracted to this one girl, and then called herself "bisexual". When the time came when these two girls were going to fool around, my friend Jeselle sed she couldn't do it.

Although she was VISUALLY attracted to the girl, she thought she was beautiful and that she was a great person...she was not sexually attracted. She got turned off as soon as she began making out with the other girl.

She then told me "I'm not bisexual. I thought I was, but im actually straight".

This is one example of someone's intepretation of self not realizing what they truly are. However, she called herself "bisexual" for a few weeks.

I've been calling myself "bisexual" for YEARS...i HIGHLY doubt im gonna wake up one day and say "shit....im really straight" or "damn...im really Gay"

I do beleive sexuality can CHANGE, but it seems to change on ITS OWN...not through the permission or force of the Individual.

Originally posted by The Achiever
There are also lots of men who have a sexual predisposition and attraction to little boys. If they don't act on the impulse they are not pedaphiles, they are simply individuals who have a socially unhealthy impulse. I'm not disagreeing with your examples of gay men living a family life or wishing they could be straight. But again, what does that have to do with our discussion.

The discussion (atleast the one we are having) was about Homosexuality being a choice, and how Regret stated that sexual preference is based on sexual activity, while I say sexual preference is based on desires and mentality.

Those men who have sexual attraction to little boys...do they also like little girls? do they also like grown men ? Do they also like grown women ?

Preference is WHAT GROUP the person prefers....not what group they decide to enact with.

Sexual Activity is done for MANY reasons, not just "this is what i want to do". Sexual Activity is often done out of peer pressure, social pressure, and to hide ones true self (hence the term "in the closet"😉

When Sexual Activity is done out of PLEASURE, THEN the preference comes about....

Originally posted by The Achiever
These examples do not at all disprove Regrets statement that actions define your sexuality not your mental or emotional preference; no more than my example disproves it. I'm sure most pedaphiles wish they weren't attracted to little kids.

And there are also Gays that wish they weren't Gay. So what ?

They're still Gay.

You JUST PROVED MY POINT...you just said there are Pedaphiles who wish they weren't attracted to little kids...if they wish this, then how the hell did they CHOOSE to like little kids ?

Preference and Orientation is about sexual DESIRES, its about what pleasures the person, NOT what the person actually DOES about it.

(

Originally posted by The Achiever
By the way, don't assume that my analogy is meant to suggest that homosexuality is otherwise similar in any way with pedaphilia - I simply brought it up to illustrate the possibility of a sexual inclination that does not without action define the individual.)

And you also helped me prove my point 😉